Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
I think I would rather they concentrate on putting more government information online, making government more open rather than implementing systems to make citizens prove who they are.
The rest of the article does gets a little wishy-washy talking about the 'Denver Dose' and other concepts that are nothing besides poorly supported theories, and even goes to complain that the current best model of the dangers of radiation doesn't fit with his own hopes and wishes. Nevertheless the graphic ATMAvator complains of doesn't have the faults he attributes to it.
First of all, enjoy a good chuckle at the term 'Biogas'. Most literature refers to it as 'Landfill gas' and the majority of landfill locations think of it as a waste product to be disposed of as cheaply as possible, mostly through flaring operations. The term 'Biogas' was invented by someone that that wanted to game California's renewable energy programs.
As a fuel, it's marginal, having about 500 BTU per standard cubic foot of gas. Most sources are 10% nitrogen, 40% CO2, 45% methane and the balance oxygen, H2S, water, ethane, ect. The energy cost to clean the gas up to the point where something as high tech as a Bloom Box can use it can reach 60% of the energy of the entire gas stream, as water and CO2 removal are both energy expensive operations.
Still, with all it's disadvantages, I hope Apple is able to make the system work reliably, if only because it's a hard engineering problem they are tackling. And it will be a good proof-of-practicality for the Bloom Boxes.
Minimum cost for me to ask Siri the same thing: $1900.
So I'm thinking I can put up with typing my questions into google for the difference.
So yeah, feel free to laugh at the people yelling at Siri through their iphone.
My second nomination would be the fairie tale collections by Terry Windling and Ellen Datlow. Starting with 'Snow White, Blood Red' and continuing through 'Black Heart, Ivory Bones', those two brought the grim back to fairie tales (and the delight too) that we miss in some of the Disney-ized versions.
http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/ is a great resource for looking up bibliographies and writing order of many of the more well known fantasy and sci-fi authors.
No, that's not some cute, obscure Japanese smiley face. It's short hand for zero last year, zero this year. I value my privacy, and if my friends want to know what I'm doing, they can call me up and ask me.
Of course the troubling thought is: Does Slashdot count as a social network?
The idea that these are 'fair lawsuits' that you and the previous poster put forth is nonsense. The article says they are looking for statutory damages. The absolute minimum is $750. Statutory damages are decided by the jury, not by the lawyers; and I know of no jury that has awarded less than $10,000. The same group has put for letters for Far Cry, extorting (via threat of law suit) $1500. Which means we are already at 200x actual damages.
Then we come to the enormous trail of evidence that has to be looked at:
A computer G in the hands of someone with lots of money to be made says address X is downloading file y.
Address X is transmitted to corporation C.
Corporation C says that address belongs to subscriber S.
Subscriber S could be the only person at the keyboard.
That entire trail has to be absolutely perfect. Every program that handled the 'evidence' can be proven never ever to make a mistake, Corporation C must know perfectly that their records are pristine and that no unauthorized persons have access, and that there is absolutely no possibility of any sort of error. There can't be any possibility that anyone could have used S's computer without her knowledge. But most importantly, the person that stands to gain many $10,000s can be trusted never to just add a few extra addresses in there. Hey, if you're going to sue 5,000 people, you might as well just toss in a few hundred more random addresses just for the fun of it and push your profit a little more. It's not like anyone is really caring how the big law firms and movie studios and distribution houses are abusing people here.
From my view point, lawyers and big content have decided that copyright infringement is a new profit center. There is no down side, all you do is grab a few random IP address, send a few thousand demand letters. The ISPs do all the leg work for you for free, and you pick one unlucky loser to actually sue so that the rest of the people that get your extortion letters are scared to tell you 'no'.
The only way to fix this mess is to remove the statutory damages; to limit damages to 10x actual damages or 50x profits made from distribution.